Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Idea: Fidelity Tests like model-viewer has #554

Open
hybridherbst opened this issue Mar 31, 2022 · 7 comments
Open

Idea: Fidelity Tests like model-viewer has #554

hybridherbst opened this issue Mar 31, 2022 · 7 comments

Comments

@hybridherbst
Copy link

This is an awesome resource.

I'm not sure if you're aware of that already, but model-viewer has a fidelity test result page and a format for how to integrate other renderers / engines:
https://modelviewer.dev/fidelity/

They have a pretty simple JSON format for how IBL, camera etc. are specified to ensure matching conditions between renderers.

For automating along with what model-viewer already does, renderers would need to be added here:
https://github.com/google/model-viewer/tree/master/packages/render-fidelity-tools/src/components/renderers

@cx20
Copy link
Owner

cx20 commented Apr 2, 2022

Sorry for the delay in replying. Thanks for the great ideas.
I too wish I could do a validation like model-viewer.
However, I lack the skills and time to do so.

BTW, I am making the following efforts to improve testing with gltf-test.
#68

@hybridherbst
Copy link
Author

Thanks for responding!
I think the interesting thing would be that the validation / image generation could run as part of what model-viewer already does. Maybe @elalish has some insights as well into whether wider comparisons would be desired inside model-viewer.

Regarding #68, that's a good start and something definitely lacking from glTF currently (defining which IBL, exposure, tonemapping a renderer should use)! Seems like model-viewer actually had similar issues, here's what looks like a shell script to prepare an IBL for filament rendering: https://github.com/google/model-viewer/blob/master/packages/render-fidelity-tools/test/renderers/filament/prepare-ibl.sh

@elalish
Copy link

elalish commented Apr 6, 2022

We'd be thrilled to have more renderers added to our fidelity test suite. It's not generally a heavy lift, especially if your package is on npm. If you're interested I'd be happy to share some pointers (like old PRs that added other renderers).

@cx20
Copy link
Owner

cx20 commented Apr 8, 2022

@ybridherbst Sorry for my late reply.

defining which IBL, exposure, tonemapping a renderer should use

Thank you for sharing your insights.
I have had a lot of advice from the Filament and Khronos peoples that if the exposures and tonemapping are not set up correctly, the results displayed will be different. I need to understand more about exposure and tonemapping besides IBL.
google/filament#3366 (comment)
KhronosGroup/glTF-Sample-Models#340 (comment)

@elalish I would like to understand how the fidelity test works.
I would be glad to know if you have any other renderer samples or pointers that would be helpful.
BTW, My skill set is old and I may need to start by getting familiar with TypeScript.

@cx20
Copy link
Owner

cx20 commented Apr 10, 2022

Thanks again to everyone who has been advising me on this repository.
@hybridherbst @elalish @emackey @donmccurdy @willeastcott @slimbuck @emadurandal @Reon90 @06wj @sonygod @DRx3D

I'm aware that this repository mechanism is a legacy mechanism.
I don't want to break links such as URL references from outside, so I'm thinking of preparing a new repository.
I have set up a discussion room. If you have any other ideas, I would appreciate your contribution.

https://github.com/cx20/gltf-test/discussions

Thanks!

@Reon90
Copy link
Contributor

Reon90 commented Apr 16, 2022

@cx20 What is the status of current repo? Are you planning to continue contributing or move your effort to new one?

@cx20
Copy link
Owner

cx20 commented Apr 16, 2022

@Reon90 I'm planning a new (modern) repository, but I think it will take some time.
Until then, I think we will continue to update this repository.

See below for our plans.
#560 (reply in thread)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants